Your claim that the players have fared far better is your opinion, nothing more. It remains a very sweeping and unsubstantiated opinion at that. The reality is it's just not that simple.

Yup, I suppose showing proof that salaries have increased almost two fold since the last lockout is just an opinion. Please keep going back to that though. If my salary doubled in the last 6 years, I would be pretty downtrodden.

In the meantime, the asset you talk about is about $240 million, which means the profit of $4-$5 million per season equates to about 1-2% of the asset. Going to tell me that you can't get a better return on investment elsewhere?

As I said before, I am backing out of this discussion. Its readily apparent that the numbers if they don't line up to the NHLPA method of thinking, they are incorrect or "unsubstantiated opinion". Lets face facts here, I am not going to be sitting on the same fence as you are. Probably never will. Both sides have had a hand in this lockout and the situation we are in today. It must be nice to live in a fantasy land where the NHL is entirely at fault while the NHLPA walks on water, but I don't have the luxury of having that dream.

Yup, I suppose showing proof that salaries have increased almost two fold since the last lockout is just an opinion. Please keep going back to that though. If my salary doubled in the last 6 years, I would be pretty downtrodden.

In the meantime, the asset you talk about is about $240 million, which means the profit of $4-$5 million per season equates to about 1-2% of the asset. Going to tell me that you can't get a better return on investment elsewhere?

As I said before, I am backing out of this discussion. Its readily apparent that the numbers if they don't line up to the NHLPA method of thinking, they are incorrect or "unsubstantiated opinion". Lets face facts here, I am not going to be sitting on the same fence as you are. Probably never will. Both sides have had a hand in this lockout and the situation we are in today. It must be nice to live in a fantasy land where the NHL is entirely at fault while the NHLPA walks on water, but I don't have the luxury of having that dream.

I've been fairly polite up until now, but keep up with your condescending insults and you will be getting locked out from this forum.

You were the one insistent on replying to my posts even after I made clear it was pointless for us to discuss this, so it would be great if you backed out of this discussion.

I’ve heard from several people that Bettman’s approach to bargaining has done nothing more than strengthened the player’s stance. If you know hockey players, you're aware they don’t like to be pushed around. The “take it or leave it” approach, along with the embarrassing first offer, and the way certain owners have conducted themselves in bargaining sessions has done little more than make the union stronger. Sources say Boston owner Jeremy Jacobs is a big part of the problem here. If the NHLPA could reach across the table and grab somebody there’s a decent chance they would grab Jacobs before Bettman.

You would think some owners would tell Bettman to change the way he’s acted during this lockout. Bettman has done little to help the perception of NHL owners as a whole. Sure I’ve heard from some players who are unhappy with their union but for the most part the players have given little indication they’re prepared to cave, which if you love the NHL is a scary proposition. Hockey players take a team-first attitude on the ice and have carried that over into these negotiations. In other words I’m not sure any player is ready to undermine the NHLPA. This could always change in a hurry.

The players have been confusing as well, although not to the extent of the owners. The NHLPA has suggested the previous CBA was bad for the players yet Don Fehr said they were willing to continue playing under the same agreement. I have a hard time understanding how the previous deal was bad for any player when you see salaries increase and how much cake these guys bring in every two weeks. If it was so bad then why would you be willing to continue to operate under the same terms?

I don’t like how the NHLPA structures their meetings or conference calls. It truly doesn’t allow for players with an opposing view to speak up. Seriously, who is going to lash out with over 100 other players on the same call? It’s an intimidating setting when you have little support backing you.

From what I hear the first 30 minutes of these calls are spent telling the players how bad they’re being screwed and how bad future NHL players will be screwed as well. All it does is set the mood for the rest of the call. Again it doesn’t exactly create a setting for players to voice their concerns or ask questions.

It’s hard to know who is telling the truth when you hear both sides speak. On one hand Fehr accuses the NHL of being unwilling to negotiate the way contract rights are spelled out in the league’s latest offer, while NHL deputy Commissioner Bill Daly refutes this telling me this is 100% false.

Sources say Fehr has also told the players the deal will only get better the longer you wait. I know of several retired players who lost a full year’s pay in 2004 who would disagree. Then again those players have no skin in the game today so it’s easy for them to say that now.

At least we thought. Here we are, after record revenues, attendance, television ratings, and popularity, we’re back to square one.Which leads to one question…what the hell are we doing?If the NHL and the NHLPA thinks all will be forgiven this go around you better think again. This isn’t the NFL and there will be no celebration this time.

6 months ago I never would've predicted we'd be in this situation given the state of the NHL.

S.Fehr and B.Daly talked extensively on the phone on Tues about a variety of issues. Hopefully it leads to meaningful negotiating.

I know I'm desperate for any positive sign but I think this could be one. Steve Fehr and Daly are likely the best chance at getting a deal done soon.

From what I've heard of Steve Fehr, he's more of a peace maker and diplomat than his brother in negotiations. And it's pretty clear the tone Bettman prefers to set, so the less he's involved probably the better.

Yup, I suppose showing proof that salaries have increased almost two fold since the last lockout is just an opinion. Please keep going back to that though. If my salary doubled in the last 6 years, I would be pretty downtrodden.

In the meantime, the asset you talk about is about $240 million, which means the profit of $4-$5 million per season equates to about 1-2% of the asset. Going to tell me that you can't get a better return on investment elsewhere?....

Again, salaries have increased only about 56%, not double. And it's only about 28% since before the lockout.

Secondly, 1-2% is not return on investment. It would only be ROI in a theoretical situation of someone purchasing a team today, keeping it for one season, then selling it at the same price. If you want to calculate the actual ROI, you have to use the amount of money that was actually invested, and factor in asset appreciation as well. That number looks to be more like 6%, though we don't have all the numbers to know for sure.

Yup, I suppose showing proof that salaries have increased almost two fold since the last lockout is just an opinion. Please keep going back to that though. If my salary doubled in the last 6 years, I would be pretty downtrodden.

In the meantime, the asset you talk about is about $240 million, which means the profit of $4-$5 million per season equates to about 1-2% of the asset. Going to tell me that you can't get a better return on investment elsewhere?

As I said before, I am backing out of this discussion. Its readily apparent that the numbers if they don't line up to the NHLPA method of thinking, they are incorrect or "unsubstantiated opinion". Lets face facts here, I am not going to be sitting on the same fence as you are. Probably never will. Both sides have had a hand in this lockout and the situation we are in today. It must be nice to live in a fantasy land where the NHL is entirely at fault while the NHLPA walks on water, but I don't have the luxury of having that dream.

I am not trying to stir up a fight here, but I had to make a point on this last statement you made. Obviously the owners locked out the players, and refused to let them play under the old CBA. That being said, yes the NHL and the PA are both at fault here to varying extents. I believe the owners and Bettman are more at fault, which is partially why I take the players side, lets look at the facts;

- Bettman and the owners have been negotiating in bad faith since day 1 (look at the first proposal they made), and they refuse to negotiate unless it is under preconditioned terms.

- Fehr and the players have consistently put out proposals with different methods of how to get their revenue share to what the league is asking, and they got shot down without any consideration for what they are proposing.

- Bettman and Fehr are both trying to win a PR battle, difference is Bettman is making proposals that look good to fans, so they will back him, but when they players read through it, they realize he never had any intention of doing anything the players asked.

- The players are willing to go down to 50/50, it will take about 2 seasons to get there, but they will get there, all they ask is current contracts thatthe OWNERS willingly signed before the lockout be honored (not a lot to ask, considering they were given a contract right before the lockout stating they would be payed X amount) but the owners are refusing that now.

I am on the players side, but nothing I mentioned was based on opinion, or bias. Everything I wrote is factual, and if you really want I can post links to back up everything I have written.

- The players are willing to go down to 50/50, it will take about 2 seasons to get there, but they will get there, all they ask is current contracts thatthe OWNERS willingly signed before the lockout be honored (not a lot to ask, considering they were given a contract right before the lockout stating they would be payed X amount) but the owners are refusing that now.

What's kind of funny about that is that the players have never been guaranteed the money due to the escrow system that they negotiated in the last cba.

The only money that they have ever been guaranteed is signing bonuses.

What's kind of funny about that is that the players have never been guaranteed the money due to the escrow system that they negotiated in the last cba.

The only money that they have ever been guaranteed is signing bonuses.

True, but I think what makes this worse to the players is when a team like Minnesota gets into a bidding war and shells out two 13-year $100 million contracts, then three months later the owner is sitting across from them saying franchises aren't making a profit because player's salaries are too high.

name='Euro_Twins' timestamp='1351711486' post='2333129']I am not trying to stir up a fight here, but I had to make a point on this last statement you made. Obviously the owners locked out the players, and refused to let them play under the old CBA. That being said, yes the NHL and the PA are both at fault here to varying extents. I believe the owners and Bettman are more at fault, which is partially why I take the players side, lets look at the facts;

- Bettman and the owners have been negotiating in bad faith since day 1 (look at the first proposal they made), and they refuse to negotiate unless it is under preconditioned terms.

- Fehr and the players have consistently put out proposals with different methods of how to get their revenue share to what the league is asking, and they got shot down without any consideration for what they are proposing.

- Bettman and Fehr are both trying to win a PR battle, difference is Bettman is making proposals that look good to fans, so they will back him, but when they players read through it, they realize he never had any intention of doing anything the players asked.

- The players are willing to go down to 50/50, it will take about 2 seasons to get there, but they will get there, all they ask is current contracts thatthe OWNERS willingly signed before the lockout be honored (not a lot to ask, considering they were given a contract right before the lockout stating they would be payed X amount) but the owners are refusing that now.

I am on the players side, but nothing I mentioned was based on opinion, or bias. Everything I wrote is factual, and if you really want I can post links to back up everything I have written.[/u]

Where is the fan outrage at owners not wanting to honor already signed contracts? When a player does this in any league he becomes the devil incarnate. I despise the tactic used by the owners during the days leading up to the expiration of the prior CBA. They outragously outbid eachother to overpay the few top end FA's fully knowing their future intentions of reniging with new CBA negotiations. That's dirty. I side on the side of the players because of this. I'm not a basketball fan at all but maybe this is the season that draws my interest. Sad.

Can somebody please tell me why everything above is underlined? What button did I push to make it stop?

I am not trying to stir up a fight here, but I had to make a point on this last statement you made. Obviously the owners locked out the players, and refused to let them play under the old CBA. That being said, yes the NHL and the PA are both at fault here to varying extents. I believe the owners and Bettman are more at fault, which is partially why I take the players side, lets look at the facts;

- Bettman and the owners have been negotiating in bad faith since day 1 (look at the first proposal they made), and they refuse to negotiate unless it is under preconditioned terms.

- Fehr and the players have consistently put out proposals with different methods of how to get their revenue share to what the league is asking, and they got shot down without any consideration for what they are proposing.

- Bettman and Fehr are both trying to win a PR battle, difference is Bettman is making proposals that look good to fans, so they will back him, but when they players read through it, they realize he never had any intention of doing anything the players asked.

- The players are willing to go down to 50/50, it will take about 2 seasons to get there, but they will get there, all they ask is current contracts thatthe OWNERS willingly signed before the lockout be honored (not a lot to ask, considering they were given a contract right before the lockout stating they would be payed X amount) but the owners are refusing that now.

I am on the players side, but nothing I mentioned was based on opinion, or bias. Everything I wrote is factual, and if you really want I can post links to back up everything I have written.

I will say this, you have hit the nail on the head with every one of your complaints. At the same time though, as you mentioned, the NHLPA has fault in this which you didn't mention at all.

The NHLPA has not been negotiating in good faith either. Their delays with their first proposal (3 weeks) and waiting until the last minute to come to the table after the league said it was ready to start negotiating in January. I have called out the NHL proposal already numerous times. No sense of urgency and dragging things out is not negotiating in good faith.

Fehr has been looking at "alternate methods" and I applaud him for doing so. At the same time, if one side is speaking English and the other side comes to the table with an agreement set in Spanish, is that necessarily right? I do get what you are saying. The NHL should be looking at these proposals and be more willing to consider them. What I fault Fehr and the players with is not speaking the same language when they come to the bargaining table. This is where the disconnect lies right here. You would think by now both sides would be speaking the same language and they are not.

Bettman's proposals are definitely not what they are being advertised to be. The NHLPA is also guilty of this as well. For instance, in the NHLPA 3rd proposal, the numbers never get to the 50/50 split that the NHLPA makes it out to be.

Again, salaries have increased only about 56%, not double. And it's only about 28% since before the lockout.

Secondly, 1-2% is not return on investment. It would only be ROI in a theoretical situation of someone purchasing a team today, keeping it for one season, then selling it at the same price. If you want to calculate the actual ROI, you have to use the amount of money that was actually invested, and factor in asset appreciation as well. That number looks to be more like 6%, though we don't have all the numbers to know for sure.

True, it is not double, but you also cannot count before the lockout either. Clubs were spending 76% of their revenue on salaries and changes had to be made for the long term survival of the league. Remember, this was needed at the time.

Player salaries average after the lockout year concessions were 1.4 million. In 2011 they were 2.45 million. I would guess they have gone up in the year after that, but thats 75% higher and we still have another year to tack on which we don't know the numbers for.

As for the ROI, you are correct. I am just calculating how much they are making in terms of the asset they own. By the way, making $5 million off a $240 million dollar asset is only 2% of the asset in terms of the profit. If the owner instead took $240 million and put it in an interest baring checking account, he would make 3% on his investment.

True, but I think what makes this worse to the players is when a team like Minnesota gets into a bidding war and shells out two 13-year $100 million contracts, then three months later the owner is sitting across from them saying franchises aren't making a profit because player's salaries are too high.

i agree. what leipold did puts a really big stain on the owners image. can't believe that he is on the negotating committee.

but my impressions from reading some of these quotes by players is that they act like they have always gotten every penny of their contracts in the past cba, which isn't true. i think it just shows how misinformed some of these players are.

The commish has three groups of owners: the ones who want to play; the ones in the middle, including Tampa and Nashville, who want a better collective bargaining agreement but recognize not playing is worse; and the hardliners. It would be a mistake to underestimate the last group. There are several who would rather cancel the season than accept a bad deal because they are hemorrhaging money and need immediate satisfaction.

While the players believe Boston Bruins owner Jeremy Jacobs is calling the shots, an educated guess at the final group includes but may not be limited to Anaheim, Columbus, Florida, the Islanders, Phoenix, St. Louis, Washington and Dallas -- enough to block any agreement from getting done (It's tough to lock it down because owners are forbidden to discuss this stuff. Attempts to talk to a couple were politely shot down).

also another couple interesting tidbits from the article

Thought for sure Minnesota would be in the hardline group with Wild owner Craig Leipold on the negotiating committee. But a few sources said they think he wants to play, eventually. Too much momentum to lose

Comcast chairman and CEO Brian Roberts on a conference call last week, courtesy Adweek: "I can tell you we're pretty disappointed with regard to the lockout. I don't think we should say a heck of a lot more. I think that we're just hopeful that the ownership and the players can get together and get on with the season." Comcast owns NBC and the Philadelphia Flyers.

Which is even more questionable why Bettman changed the rules to only need 8 owners to back him in order to initiate a lockout. It should be a majority, not a minority. The hardliners are doing their part to destroy the popularity of NHL hockey, which is bad for everyone.

Just a quick note to those of you who I have been interacting with....

First off, I would like to apologize for my crappy behavior. I have sent out a few parting shots at people, and this isn't the way to act on a public forum. As many of you know, I feel strongly about this situation in blaming both sides for their conduct. I also understand that I am in a forum of people who, as a majority, like the NHLPA and what they stand for. While I don't agree with everything everyone says here, there are some good points being made for the NHLPA that I acknowledge. There are also some things which I believe to be incorrect that I have tried to correct people on, but not the right way to do so. Some of the parting shots I have thrown people have not been right and I wouldn't like it if I was put in your shoes.

To put it simply, I am going to be tossing in discussion points, but I won't be engaging people in active discussion like I have been. I really have been almost emotionally involved in this discussion because of just how upset I am with the NHL and NHLPA with this whole mess. This lockout has consumed me to a certain point, and that is bad for my health. I have spent time on social networking publicly speaking about the faults of both of these sides and how upset I am with them. This is not the kind of person I am to be honest. This coming from someone who is positive, energetic, a leader, respectable, and most importantly, a real hockey fan.

To those of you who I have upset, I apologize.

To those of you who are typing up responses to things I have posted here, don't anticipate a reply.

I will still be active, but I am really going to knock things down and go low key for a while. Its time I put this lockout and the way I feel about it out of my head and concentrate on something else. Maybe computer games, work, refereeing hockey, or any one of the many things I enjoy doing. This lockout is really upsetting, but its time to move on.

True, but I think what makes this worse to the players is when a team like Minnesota gets into a bidding war and shells out two 13-year $100 million contracts, then three months later the owner is sitting across from them saying franchises aren't making a profit because player's salaries are too high.

...

Minnesota did what it thought it needed to in order to be competitive within the previous CBA. They are still allowed to criticize that CBA (player salaries) without being accused of hypocrisy. Your argument would only hold water if the owners weren't forced to operate and compete under the rules outlined in the CBA.

Contract length limits and a reduction in player salaries under a new CBA would go far to solve that problem...

Tim Thomas - Patriot and generally awesome human being.

Romans 10:13 - For whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved.